On Ms. Noem and Mr. Mullin

Let’s reflect just very briefly on the political demise of former Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem. The first reflection is one I’ve already made here, and with regard to Ms. Noem, to me the most important: I was genuinely sorry to see her go. She had become such a caricature for the Trump Regime’s Nazi-like immigration enforcement activities that I considered every day she remained at her post a day in which millions of moderate Americans would be reminded that they had to vote against Republicans in the upcoming November elections, thus strengthening the chances for American democracy to survive. I had never seen the $220 million ICE recruitment video starring Ms. Noem that was reportedly pivotal in getting her fired before the furor over it erupted during her recent Senate hearing; now that I have, my primary reaction was sympathy for Ms. Noem’s horse, who had to be both chagrined at being part of such an embarrassing spectacle and worried that Ms. Noem would shoot it when the video was completed, although at the same time being heartened that it wasn’t the biggest horse’s a– … er … behind … in the production.

On to U.S. OK Sen. Markwayne Mullin, whom President Donald Trump is nominating to replace Ms. Noem as Homeland Secretary. First, I truly wonder whether Mr. Mullin’s parents simply couldn’t decide whether he looked like a “Mark” or a “Wayne” when he was born. Based upon what we’ve seen of and learned about him since Mr. Trump put his name forth, it would appear that the Senator’s parents would have been closer to the mark (so to speak 😉) had they named him, “Rocco,” “Spike,” or “Hugger,” but all of us parents understand that no one can predict these things in advance. 😊

There are those who might rationally oppose Mr. Mullin’s confirmation as Homeland Secretary based upon his comments on Fox News about Alex Pretti the day after ICE Agents murdered Mr. Pretti in Minneapolis: “A deranged individual who came in to cause massive damage with a loaded pistol was shot and killed.” For Mr. Mullin to make such a declaration after there was sufficient video available to establish that such was false propaganda would, in a rational world, be sufficient to give any ethical Senator considering Mr. Mullin’s nomination concerns about Mr. Mullin’s judgement and veracity, but given the Trump Regime’s Rogue’s Gallery Cabinet, such a misrepresentation simply means that Mr. Mullin will fit right in. If I were a Senator, I’d vote to confirm Mr. Mullin. I still believe in the principle I first articulated in these pages years ago: any nominee of a President to a senior Administration post should be confirmed, subject to two criteria: whether the candidate is objectively qualified for the position; and the absence of any other objective disqualifying criteria (prior criminal conviction, demonstrable drug abuse problem, etc.). Although Mr. Mullin reportedly has no background in homeland security issues, it is seemingly likely that he is no less qualified than any other nominee that Mr. Trump might put forward, and he is arguably less abjectly ill-suited for Homeland Security than Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard are for their offices. Additionally, as we are all well aware, immigration policy is set by Mr. Trump and his (let’s be gentle) autocratically-inclined Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller; whomever they put in the Homeland Security seat is simply going to execute their bidding. The nominee’s subjective leanings – e.g., in this instance that he is arguably going to be too hardline on immigration policy – shouldn’t, in my view, be part of the assessment. I hope that Democrats don’t spend too much emotion trying to contest a confirmation which, given Republican control of the Senate and Mr. Mullin’s being a sitting Senator, is a done deal.

Two final impressions: the first – a parallel if not a repetition of the comment above regarding Ms. Noem — is that Mr. Mullin’s replacement of Ms. Noem, taken together with the Regime’s ICE’s recent withdrawal from “Blue Cities,” will almost certainly release some of the pent-up steam against the Regime’s thuggish immigration enforcement policies that has built up during the first part of this year. I consider this release, this far from November, to be an unfortunate outcome for our democracy.

Second, if I could make any recommendation to Mr. Mullin, it would be this: the Regime’s attack on Iran, no matter how one views it from a foreign policy perspective, has changed the fundamentals of your job. Spend less of your and your staff’s energy on chasing down illegal immigrants who haven’t committed crimes following their initial illegal entry, and immediately bring back any experts in Middle East terrorism that Elon Musk’s moronic DOGE purges may have terminated from the federal government. Start consulting Homeland Security veterans from the George W. Bush and Obama Administrations about how to best to detect and keep Americans safe from terrorist activities within the U.S. by Iranian sleeper cells. To anyone who doesn’t believe that such quiescent cells haven’t been here for years, awaiting instructions from the Iranian Regime: I envy you your life in CandyLand. Hopefully, Mr. Mullin recognizes that he doesn’t have that luxury.

We’ll see what happens.

Two Impressions on the Epstein Files

[It has occurred to me, given little NPR’s recent reports that the Trump Regime’s Justice Department has failed to release an Epstein victim’s witness statements allegedly describing that victim’s encounters with President Donald Trump, that the mighty New York Times had to be a bit disgruntled at being scooped. I share a bit of the Times’ chagrin. 😉 What follows was substantially completed before NPR’s recent publication, deferred for other posts. In entering it now, I’m supposing: Better late than never.]

You certainly don’t need a recitation of the facts surrounding the evil perpetrated by the late Jeffrey Epstein and those who collaborated with him. Nor do you need a rundown on the continuing rank hypocrisy and obstructionism – most glaring under the Trump Administration, but certainly not confined to the Trump Administration – of the various law enforcement agencies over many years who have professed sympathy for Epstein’s victims while mostly doing nothing to enable them to obtain justice. Only two impressions.

At the time this is typed, in excess of 3 million of what has been reported to be between 5 and 6 million records in the Trump Regime’s Department of Justice’s investigative files on Epstein have been released, and the Department has announced that it will not release the last 2 million. It’s hard to see how release of these last remaining records can be compelled; Congress could pass a law, but it’s already done that, and the Regime clearly couldn’t care less. I have also seen it reported that President Donald Trump’s name appears in the files over 1000 times. Although it is undisputed that he maintained a relationship with Epstein over quite a span of years, the President has vigorously denied that he ever engaged in any illicit activities with Epstein’s underage female victims (or, let’s call them what they were: girls). At the same time, it’s clear that Mr. Trump’s toadies at the Department of Justice will follow whatever he orders. The crux of it is that Mr. Trump – his own savviest media advisor – knows – he knows – that stonewalling on this issue is terribly politically damaging. If the President was confident that he would not be hurt too badly by the files’ full disclosure, one can tenably surmise based upon his past behavior that the last 2 million records would have been released by now. So I ponder: what is the one thing that a man might fear who has been able to maintain the rabid support of his base despite his audio-taped indication that he could “grab [women] by the p—y,” despite his negligently causing hundreds of thousands of unnecessary COVID-related American deaths, despite his inexplicably obsequious relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite his 34 felony convictions, and despite his incitement of an traitorous attack on our nation’s Capitol? What is the one revelation that a man, who has politically survived his undisputed commission of so many detestable actions with his core base intact, might fear would finally turn his rabid supporters against him?

I’ll leave that one to you.

As to the second impression: I never thought I’d say this; anyone who knows me or reads these notes may well understandably consider me oblivious, paranoid, senseless as a goose, or dumber than a rock – or all of the above, plus dozens of other similar apt descriptions — but neither you nor I have probably generally considered me to be … naïve. But I was. All these years, I scoffed at conspiracist groups who maintained that the world was being run by a global cabal of elite pedophiles. The Epstein files that have been released seemingly indicate that there does indeed exist an international group of wealthy business and government elites across the political spectrum who have and do indeed believe that they are entitled to abuse and destroy the lives of the vulnerable for their own pleasure. Although it is still uncertain which of the powerful men coming into Epstein’s orbit exploited the women trafficked by Epstein, it seems clear that given the number of men named and the number of Epstein victims that have come forward, that many, many men were involved. While these conspiracists were clearly wrong with regard to some vital particulars – the pedophilia cabal they warned against obviously does not include all of the globally politically and financial powerful, it is certainly not limited to left wing elites, and (wait for it) Donald Trump is most certainly not the man who is going to bring it to justice for the victims — arguably one must concede that this particular conspiracy theory was not entirely without a grain of reality.

I never believed it. One or two megarich and powerful monsters, sure; we have constant evidence of the evil in the world. But the kind of concerted and broad ring that Mr. Epstein appears to have developed and serviced? I never thought that such could actually exist. I was confident that these conspiracists were entirely wacked out, howling at the moon about global pedophilia rings while standing in a Los Angeles parking lot waiting to prove that the 1969 lunar landing was a hoax or scanning the sky for Italian lasers altering voting machines.

It would appear that their claims of the existence of an international pedophilia ring weren’t entirely wrong, after all.

The State of the Union I’m Hoping For

This post runs contrary to my general rule against writing and posting on the same day; it arises from an email exchange I had with a close friend earlier today.

President Donald J. Trump delivers his Presidential State of the Union Address to Congress this evening. All who care are aware that Mr. Trump’s conduct of the presidency during the first year of his second term has been so disreputable that his approval rating has plummeted among all voter segments save his hardest-core supporters, and in even that segment he has sustained erosion. I have heard commentators opine in recent days that because the speech will be watched by a wide swath of Americans across the political spectrum, the President’s advisors see this State of the Union Address as perhaps his last opportunity (think about that; he’s only been back in office a year) to right his sinking popularity and at the same time provide a campaign lifeline to Republican candidates representing swing areas (and possibly not-normally-swing areas) who seemingly currently face the prospect of a political bloodbath. To achieve the result that Mr. Trump’s advisors and his terrified Republican officeholder supplicants hope for, Mr. Trump will need to project a reasonable tone, acknowledge the majority of Americans’ fears about their economic circumstances and the country’s future while laying out specific proposals to address these Americans’ financial plight, express regret about the Supreme Court’s recent ruling vitiating his tariff policy without descending into vituperation, point out the way his administration has shut down the border while perhaps indicating that ICE will be adopting a lighter touch in its activities within our cities, etc., etc., etc.

I am confident that these Republican worthies (obviously using that term loosely) fervently hope he will avoid a harsh, combative tone of denial, or claim that America is in a golden age, or claim that America is loved around the world, or any declaration that affordability is a hoax, or any declaration that his administration intends to take steps to prevent widespread voter fraud in the 2026 elections, or personal attacks on Democrats, or racially-tinged attacks on immigrants, or above all, personal attacks on the Supreme Court – including the two Justices he appointed — that recently struck down his fairly unpopular tariff policy. (I admit that I felt perverse amusement when following the adverse decision, Mr. Trump referred to the three Republican-appointed Justices who rejected his claim to broad tariffing authority as “lapdogs”; I considered his comment an unwittingly indictment of the three Republican-appointed Justices who did vote to uphold his tariffing authority – Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh – who are, indeed, lapdogs.)

You and I are both sufficiently aware of my fallibility, but I am nonetheless going to make a straightforward pronouncement here: Mr. Trump is at this point congenitally incapable of performing in the manner his advisors wish and his Republican supplicants need to politically survive. He will claim that under his leadership, that our union is strong; that the economy is strong; that the world is more secure, and he alone has been able to bring peace in about 100 countries (none of which actually seem to be at peace 😉); that he does intend to take steps to avoid voter fraud in certain areas (all Democratic strongholds); that ICE has made the country safer; and that the Supreme Court has acted shamefully and hurt our country by its recent tariff ruling, and he intends to impose more tariffs. In short, he will adopt the combative tone and say all the things that his advisors and fellow Republicans want him to avoid.

Although I have continued with my recent months’ habit of not watching or listening to Mr. Trump’s lies and loathsome diatribes – my heart is not that strong – I intend to watch the address tonight, hoping for the best – the best being that Mr. Trump will indeed perform as I have predicted. Although one is heartsick at the hardship, the lost and ruined lives, the irreparable damage to innocent children’s psyches that this Regime has cruelly wrought, it is seemingly clear that each report of a new despicable outrage by the Regime – from its ICE’s Nazi-like activities and the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, to its continued refusal to even acknowledge let alone address many Americans’ economic plight, to its continued refusal to provide impoverished Americans with healthcare financial assistance, to its refusal to follow the Epstein law and provide justice to the Epstein victims, to its threats to invade Greenland, to its attacks on its own Supreme Court (which must make even some semi-perceptive MAGAs wonder if he’s acting legally), to its plastering Mr. Trump’s name on and flying banners with Mr. Trump’s picture from various federal buildings, to … you get it (I apologize if I have left out any of the Regime’s shameless activities you find the most offensive) – has, at one level, become means to an end. As British Prime Minister Winston Churchill told the House of Commons in June, 1940 – and I make this analogy intentionally, and not lightly – “We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering.” At this point, I don’t want to see Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., or Epstein-implicated Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick fired; they serve the same emotive rallying point for Regime opponents as MAGAs used to point to former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. If Mr. Trump was savvy enough to jettison some of these subordinates, it would take some of the steam out of the Regime’s opposition.

Returning to a theme you have heard me repeat here endlessly: given the majority of American voters’ selection of Donald Trump in November of 2024, I – like our European allies — have lost and will probably never regain confidence in the good sense of the majority of American citizens. It is clear that in order to get the pivotal segment of our citizens who inexplicably thought Mr. Trump was the solution to their difficulties to continue to see reality, they must be regularly confronted with Regime outrages. Ironically – and at the same time unfortunately and happily — Mr. Trump seems willing to accommodate this need.

I would suggest that we must face the fact that at this point there is no chance – zero — that we as a nation are in a position to face the myriad of pressing substantive problems we should be addressing – the economic insecurity of a large percentage of our people, what meaningful work can be developed for our citizens whose skill sets may be less well suited to the automated future, our federal debt, climate change, artificial intelligence, progress in the health sciences, the improvement and broadening of our education systems, a coherent immigration policy, our proper role in world affairs, you name it – until we manage to stifle the Regime of ignorance, denial and autocracy now governing our country. We need to put our substantive concerns aside, and for the present absorb the future Regime outrages that seem likely to further distress the pivotal middle segment of our citizens as setbacks that might ultimately enable us to preserve our democracy. Let the President continue to blithely deny that many Americans are suffering economically. Let him idiotically withhold vaccines, moronically declare Tylenol unsafe for pregnant women. Let him impose more illegal tariffs. Let him withhold the last 2 million Epstein documents. Let him fly his picture from every building in Washington. Indeed, let him bulldoze the West Wing, erect a castle, and paint his face on it. These are arguably means to an end.

There are, of course, two exceptions to this rule. The first is that we don’t want any more people’s lives sacrificed to Regime violence. The second involves the measures that the Regime is almost certainly going to attempt to subvert free and fair 2026 federal elections. These must be contested by all legal and peaceful means available. I’ll venture that the culmination is likely to arrive this summer when Mr. Trump knows — when it absolutely sinks in – that a fair election will be a tidal wave against him; that he will be facing circumstances, unlike his loss in 2020 — which, although clear, was undeniably close in states such as Georgia and Wisconsin – where most citizens will intuitively know from their own feelings that despite Regime claims, Republican defeats weren’t “rigged,” weren’t due to “voter fraud.”

That will be our most dangerous period. At the start of the Regime’s term, I thought the struggle might be coming in 2028; as I’ve indicated more recently, I think that it will be upon us in 2026. (Get ready to attend your next local NO KINGS rally on March 28. 😊) In a positive statement in which I wholeheartedly believe: if we can get through it, we are still the United States of America, the most democratic nation in the history of the earth, which despite its faults has through its goodwill, industry, and initiative done more good for more people than any other nation in history and solved the greatest number of the greatest problems humankind has faced. The substantive and political challenges we now confront can be addressed – if not entirely during my generation’s lifetime, during the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren — if we manage to secure our democracy.

We’ll see what happens tonight.

Mr. Warhol Predicted our Government’s Failure

This is simply a plaint, nothing you haven’t already realized yourself, indeed something I think I may have already noted here at some time in the past, but one of the perks of having a site like this is the opportunity to state the obvious when you wish to. Although one could decry the injustice inherent in a couple of the observations made below about the complexion and standing of our early members of Congress, I don’t think anyone can dispute their accuracy.

This also the rare post that I think any American of any political persuasion across our entire spectrum would agree with.

A large share of our people are currently bemoaning the fact that our toothless Congress – some would instead characterize the members of Congress as lacking other body parts than teeth – are refusing to stand up to President Donald Trump although they – Republicans as well as Democrats – are well aware that his excesses are dangerous for our country and do little or nothing to address the issues of greatest concern to their constituents. Instead, they cower in corners and whisper. Why? We’ve brought it upon ourselves with our descent into the social media snippet, reality TV, hyperbole, glitz, and Let No Complex Thought Be Left Unthought Culture. The trouble with our Congress today is not that it is filled with people who fundamentally believe in MAGAism or Democratic Socialism, or in White Christian America or Black Lives Matter, or in Regulation or Deregulation, or in Abortion or Choice, or in Guns or No Guns, or in anything else.

They believe in Andy Warhol.

Mr. Warhol, as virtually all are aware – at least of his imputed observation, if not that it is attributed to him – was quoted by Time Magazine in 1967 as saying, “In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes.” It doesn’t matter that it is now disputed that Mr. Warhol actually ever uttered his most famous statement, or if he did, that he was the first to say it; it will forever be attributed to him.

What matters is the observation’s continuing resonance – much truer today than when the quote appeared in Time almost 60 years ago. Our members of Congress need – apparently, lust for – fame. They need everybody to know that they’re somebody. Apparently, simply being a member of Congress makes them somebody. That’s why we have no functioning federal legislative branch.

I will assert that the situation we have today was unfathomable for the Founding Fathers. In a time when only white men could vote and, practically speaking, only rich white men could literally afford to donate their time – that is indeed what they were doing — to participating in the federal government, the notion that these proud landowners would totally obsequiously surrender the prerogatives of their Congressional offices to the President of the United States, or change their views to stoop to pander their constituents – the vast, vast majority of whom were incredibly poorer and incredibly less versed in the matters of the country and the world than they were — was inconceivable to them. In the Declaration of Independence, a number had literally pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to the founding of a new national enterprise. They didn’t enter Congress to become somebody; each of them already was somebody. Their sentiments upon entering Congress may be best expressed in the words of another politician in another nation at almost the same time — Irish-Anglo Edmund Burke, considered the founder of modern Conservativism (you know, the real kind), who once told his Parliament constituents that a representative’s “ … unbiased opinion, his mature judgement, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”

Now, we have a bunch of gutless lickspittles who pander to the basest tastes of their constituents so they can keep their tender tushies in warm cushy Congressional seats. It is clear that the lust to keep these seats isn’t about the actual political power or purpose they provide; they have entirely ceded these to the President of their party (startlingly true right now with the particularly unscrupulous and ruthless Mr. Trump, but just as true on the other side of the political aisle when the president is a popular Democrat). At this point, it seemingly isn’t always even about a normal citizen – one of us — being able to make him/herself a somebody by entering Congress, because it seems that more and more members of Congress already are “somebody” in the traditional sense – i.e., wealthy; so the office cannot be for the financial advantages or societal entrée it might thereafter provide. (Actually, for our really wealthy members of Congress, it seems that the choice came down to running for Congress or buying a professional sports team, and buying a Congressional seat was cheaper and easier than buying a professional franchise.)

No, it’s as Mr. Warhol (apocryphally, at least) said: it’s about the Fame. “Look, look at me. I not only need to be somebody; I need you to know I’m somebody!” Mr. Trump is of course the most shameless example of it, but virtually all of them suffer from it. (Oh, for the good old days when Robber Barons like John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, and Henry Ford, who were already confident that they were somebody, were satisfied to run their businesses and exploit the vast majority of Americans from behind the scenes without feeling the need to foist their views upon our citizens in public. 😉)

You want evidence? (Although I don’t think you need it.) It’s said today that Republican members of Congress fear Mr. Trump. Actually, they don’t. What they fear is his influence with their constituents – not the same. Let’s assume for a moment that we do have free and fair elections in 2026, that current projections of a dramatic Democratic capture of the House of Representatives come to fruition, and that credible polls thereafter attribute the Republican electoral debacle to the unpopularity of the Trump Regime. In such event, what do you want to bet that the most dangerous place to be the day after the election will be at the door of the Republican Congressional cloakroom as those Republicans who did survive rush out to find a camera to distance themselves from Mr. Trump and all that his Regime has done during its first two years?

I know. You won’t take the bet.

I have to admit that I used to be firmly in favor of term limits for members of Congress. I guess I still am; but I consider it a much lesser priority than I used to. What these people lust for isn’t power, it’s fame. To get their seats, they all pander to whatever constituency or TV camera or media outlet that will get and keep them there. If one leaves Congress, s/he will simply be replaced by another with the same yearning.

I don’t know how we recover a Congress with [you fill in whatever body part you consider most symbolic of inner strength]. Because in fact, our Congress is simply a reflection of what we’ve become.

Our Congress is us.

A Greenland Checkmate – If NATO Nations Stand Fast: a Postscript and Correction

Yesterday, it appeared that President Donald Trump and the NATO nations aligned against him over his attempts to extort Denmark, Greenland, and NATO into transferring control of Greenland to the United States were taking steps to move back from the brink of war. Mr. Trump at one point apparently indicated that he would not attempt to use force to take control of Greenland. Whether our Manchild President stepped back from the brink because the NATO nations found a way to placate Mr. Trump, as he claimed, or because somebody woke him up sufficiently to the possibility, as suggested in this post, that the conflict that would ensue if he ordered a military invasion of Greenland could effectively spell the end of his presidency, it does not appear – at least as this is typed – that the United States and its putative NATO allies are headed for any immediate armed conflict.

But who knows what the case will be by the time you read this? We’ll have to see what happens today. And then tomorrow. And then the next day.

Meanwhile, the New York Times is reporting that the Regime’s ICE has started new operations in the state of Maine, targeting immigrants from Somalia. Here we go again.

On a different note, I observed here recently that I very much enjoy receiving comments – even ones pointing out that I have erred in a post. 😊 I was informed yesterday by an unimpeachable source that I had erred in this original note when I casually referred to Greenland as a “colony” of Denmark. Greenland is not a Danish colony; it is actually a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, although Denmark handles Greenland’s foreign policy and defense, and Greenland relies heavily on Denmark’s financial support, education and health care.

The record – at least on Greenland’s legal status, and at least in these pages – is now clear. 😊

Now, let’s brace for today’s rollercoaster ride.

A Greenland Checkmate – If NATO Nations Stand Fast

Clearly, a blizzard of impressions arise regarding the United States’ recent incursion into Venezuela, its capture and extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, and what might come next. This note isn’t about that. (Some day, there may be a lengthy post on Venezuela that that tries your resolve and eyesight.) That said, there is one point to be made here about the Venezuelan raid that is relevant to what follows: President Donald Trump’s comment not long after the raid, reported by multiple credible sources, that “many” Cubans were killed in the process of capturing Mr. Maduro. (The Cuban government later indicated that 32 Cuban military personnel were killed.)

So much for the Cubans. From both domestic political and geopolitical perspectives, nobody in America cares about dead Cuban soldiers.

This is about Greenland, the world’s largest island, sitting in the Western Hemisphere mostly within the Arctic Circle, a colony of Denmark – a member of NATO — since before the United States declared its independence from Great Britain. As all who care are aware, given the Trump Regime’s repeated threats in recent weeks to capture Greenland by force if the Danes, Greenlanders, and other NATO nations are unwilling to voluntarily accede to the United States’ usurpation, some eight members of NATO have responded by stationing troops in Greenland on the professed pretext of assuring Mr. Trump that the island is safe from Mr. Trump’s expressed fears of a Russian or Chinese invasion (a completely fabricated concern; Vladimir Putin has his hands full in Ukraine and Xi Jinping is eyeing Taiwan; neither has imminent plans to invade a NATO territory now significantly less strategic to him), while clearly signaling their intent to militarily resist any assault on Greenland by American troops. Today, Mr. Trump will be in Davos, Switzerland, at the world’s most renowned annual meeting of political and financial bigwigs. If credible reporting is accurate, Mr. Trump plans to pressure NATO leaders to enable him to assume control of Greenland.

Make no mistake. I remain a foreign policy disciple of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, and there is a lot to be said about securing Greenland’s strategic position for all of NATO as well for the United States in areas such as missile paths, emerging commercial waterways, and rare earth minerals, most of which you already know, much and perhaps all of which could be achieved through deft diplomacy. There is also a lot to say about Mr. Trump’s increasing erraticism and seeming detachment from reality as he completes the first year of his second term (there does seem to be something that’s changed in the President’s behavior in the last several months – even by the standards we judge him — beyond his aging reversion), but perhaps we’ll get back to that in a future post. The focus here is on the impending – and extraordinarily silly, if the matter wasn’t so serious — military crisis brought about by the Regime’s thuggish, blatantly illegal approach to wrest control of Greenland from Denmark. I was initially frustrated by the NATO nations’ response to the Regime’s bellicose overtures – to the effect that aggressive action by the Regime “would mean the end of NATO” – because such tepid responses seemed to indicate an obliviousness to the reality that Mr. Trump wants to destroy NATO, and to invite a Greenland assault would provide him a way to do so. I have since been incredibly encouraged by the NATO nations’ stationing of troops in Greenland. The question now is whether the NATO leaders have the internal fortitude to stand up to Mr. Trump’s formidable personal pressure. If they do, I would submit that no matter how outraged Mr. Trump may be – unless he is now truly delusional, which one can no longer rule out – he will see that he has been checkmated.

The bulk of this note addresses somewhat antiseptically the domestic political ramifications Mr. Trump may face if he orders a military assault on Greenland – how such an order might affect him, which is all he cares about. What can’t be ignored at the outset are the moral, legal, and potentially tragic personal consequences of what would be a deranged order to invade the island: Denmark and Greenland control Greenland. They have for centuries. We don’t. We’ve offered to take control of the island. (If they were willing, I’d support it.) They’ve said no. There is no legal or moral gray area. In a civilized world, that is the end of the story. As to the potential personal consequences: As the NATO nations with troops in Greenland make clear their readiness to confront any offensive American assault, I am outraged and terrified for the American troops and for the NATO troops — who have each sworn to serve their nations and NATO as a whole – whose lives may be forfeit, as was National Guardsman U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom’s to a Trump Regime publicity stunt, to Mr. Trump’s attempt to fulfill a totalitarian vision of hemispheric conquest which can no longer be distinguished from the Nazis’ 1930s claims of their need for Lebensraum (“Living Space”). (Don’t forget the President’s ongoing references to Canada, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s current spirited defense of Greenland. Mr. Carney clearly recognizes that if Greenland falls – I deliberately use a wartime battle reference – Canada is next.)

Credible polls indicate that an overwhelming majority of Americans – including an unusually notable segment of Mr. Trump’s hardcore base — think his designs on Greenland are completely unwarranted. Although many of these Americans may not have cared about dead Cubans, and may not understand the importance of preserving NATO for America’s security, I would submit that they will care about dead Danes, dead Canadians, dead Brits, dead French, dead Germans, dead Swedes, dead Finns, and dead Norwegians (I may be leaving a nation out; if so, I apologize) if we launch a military assault against an ally when we are so clearly in the wrong.

And much more than that: they will most certainly will care about dead Americans. NATO troops know how to shoot. I suspect that in the Greenland meetings taking place this week, one or more of the NATO leaders will make it clear to Mr. Trump — make it, as they say, crystal: If the United States makes an aggressive incursion into Greenland, there will be dead Americans.

A second factor with which Mr. Trump should be considering when pondering his malign invasion: that Congressional Democrats’ recent video reminding American military personnel about their obligation to disregard illegal orders, taken together with the Regime’s vitriolic counterattacks against those members, have made every U.S. service member acutely aware of his/her oath to disregard illegal orders. Any order to invade Greenland – an ally — will place all American troops, from commander to grunt, in a grotesquely unjust ethical quandary. If Mr. Trump orders the invasion, how many will demur? Aside from the troops’ dilemma, Mr. Trump should realize from his own self-interest – again, all he cares about — that if he loses command of the military, his presidency is effectively emasculated.

The first dead American in Greenland – and perhaps even the first dead NATO soldier – will not only mean the end of NATO; I will venture that it will mean the end of Mr. Trump’s presidency (although it may be the beginning of his dictatorship). Some Americans will reflexively jump to an “America, Right or Wrong” stance; I submit that the a vast majority will not. The domestic paroxysm resulting from a Greenland invasion added to the continuing protests related to Renee Good’s killing and ICE’s brutal immigration enforcement activities will inflame protests and violent skirmishes across this country.

Unless Mr. Trump is willing to go the final mile – declare Martial Law, and declare himself a de facto dictator (again, assuming that the American military will even follow him) — a united NATO front in Davos will effectively checkmate his designs in Greenland. I understand the NATO leaders’ continuous coddling of this President Manchild; they have seen it as their best approach to ensure that he continues to provide his lukewarm assistance to their efforts to support Ukraine. That said – and I suspect that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would agree – no amount of appeasement will deter Mr. Trump from abandoning NATO and Ukraine if he gets it in his head to do so, and NATO leaders’ obsequiousness regarding Greenland is at least as likely to encourage Mr. Trump’s arbitrary abandonment of Ukraine as deter it. I would further venture that Mr. Trump’s tariff threats against these NATO nations are strategically toothless. He can tariff these NATO nations all he wants; but for a very brief respite in the 1990s through the early 2000s, they have lived under the threat of Nazi and then Soviet/Russian aggression since 1933. Given principles of sovereignty and democracy as fundamental as exist here, tariffs are not going to cow them. (Any Supreme Court decision hereafter holding that Mr. Trump cannot use tariffs to effect his whimsical non-economic initiatives will obviously sharpen an impending Constitutional crisis.) Politically, these democratic NATO leaders can blame America for their citizens’ ensuing economic hardships, and their citizens will support them.

In the last months, I have obviously made a number of provocative comparisons between the designs and actions of the Trump Regime and past autocratic regimes, mostly in reference to the Regime’s ICE forces’ immigration enforcement measures. It is clear that the Regime’s autocratic inclinations do not stop within our borders. Although I could cite a dozen of Mr. Trump’s own comments to make the point, instead I’ll quote comments about Greenland made by Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller a couple of weeks ago. As all who care are already aware, Mr. Miller, who wields tremendous influence in the White House, said the following in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper:

“Nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland. … We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time.”

Compare that to the following:

“In this case we must not let political boundaries obscure for us the boundaries of eternal justice. … [L]et us be given the soil we need for our livelihood. True, [the nations possessing the land we covet] will not willing do this. But then the law of self-preservation goes into effect; and what is refused to amicable methods, it is up to the fist to take.”

Who do you think said that? (I know; I made it too easy.)

Adolf Hitler; Mein Kampf, Vol I, Ch. IV

In an earlier note, I commented that there was a lot to unpack in the Greenland situation; I was referring to the various substantive geopolitical issues related to the island. In the context in which we are now speaking, there is very little to unpack: there is right, and there is wrong. My use of the checkmate analogy in this note is also arguably inapposite: chess is an intellectual, antiseptic exercise; a player readily sacrifices pawns to win the game. What we are facing here is not antiseptic. It is about sovereignty and the rule of law. It is about the potential sacrifice of innocent lives. If Mr. Trump comes to understand this week that forces are resolutely arrayed against him, may he have enough remaining sense of reason – I have no illusions that he has any sense of humanity – to stand down.

We’ll see what happens.

The Year of Decision Ahead

No, this will not be our year of decision. We had our year of decision in 2024, and it appears tenable to maintain, based upon recent credible polls setting forth our citizens’ collective assessment of President Donald Trump’s performance in what has essentially been the first full year of his second term, that a solid majority of us — including a notable segment of lukewarm Trump voters who believed that he would improve their financial circumstances and be judicious in his immigration enforcement – is currently of the persuasion that we fu… er … fouled up. Knowing what we as a people know today, if a presidential election was held tomorrow, I’m not sure that former Vice President Kamala Harris would beat Mr. Trump – I fear that the prejudices of some against a female candidate of color might, despite everything, still be too strong – but I’d wager that former President Joe Biden would win — that faced with the stark choice of selecting a president either unnervingly infirm or capriciously malevolent, a majority of Americans in the swing states would prefer a grandfather figurehead to what we’ve wrought. But let’s start with the image I consider the best depiction of what I consider Mr. Trump and his regime to have done to America’s democracy at home and standing around the world during 2025; we’ll talk about what 2026 might hold on the other side.

Batman (1989): Joker Museum Scene

So … on to 2026. I am not going to try your eyesight by repeating a litany of pontifications I have made before; let’s just look at the record. Suffice it to say that if, as I believe, it is beyond Mr. Trump’s capacity to radically change his direction in the coming year, we will see more untoward monarchial ostentatiousness and self-aggrandizement, continued blatant disregard for and failure to address the financial stresses of about 80% of Americans (including millions of Trump supporters) (as overall American economic indicators and the financial markets rise, and the fortunes of the top financially secure 20% of Americans continue to multiply), continued brutally-indiscriminate immigration enforcement, continued blatant failure to meaningfully address healthcare access and healthcare cost concerns for millions of Americans (the majority of whom are Trump supporters), continued claims that Americans’ troubles are caused by something President Barack Obama did in 2009 or Mr. Biden did in 2021, continued rigid adherence to unpopular tariff policies and pressure for lower interest rates (which will seemingly collectively increase inflationary pressures on the 80% who are most adversely affected by it), continued purging of federal expertise and resources that it took us over a century to build, continued denial of scientific realities such as vaccine therapies and climate change (leading to outbreaks of diseases seemingly vanquished decades ago and once-in-a-century environmental disasters now occurring annually 😉), increased efforts to manipulate federal statistics that reflect badly on the Administration, increased deployment of National Guard and active U.S. military to locations of increased demonstrations against Administration policies, continued concessions to Middle East nations whose leaders ensure that the Trump Family’s personal financial coffers are enriched, continued erratic foreign policy forays (offending at the same time those Americans who believe in a strategic American foreign policy, and his isolationist MAGA supporters), continued transparent attempts to abandon NATO and Ukraine to Russia (at the same time thereby emboldening acquisitive dictators, offending allies upon whom we rely to aid our defense, those of us at home who believe in a strategic American world presence, and – wait for it – even his isolationist MAGA supporters, whom polls show nonetheless overwhelmingly hate Vladimir Putin), continued pursuit of criminal prosecutions against those he considers his political enemies, continued demonization of those he perceives as his opponents and/or unacceptably unclean (i.e., anybody not white, Christian, and sexually straight) and merciless retribution on those, no matter how previously slavishly supportive of him, whom the President of the United States perceives as being becoming insufficiently loyal.

I know, I know. Did I really have to remind you? Didn’t many of us just get done singing, “Silent Night”?

By this time, I’m sure you’ve already thought of several I’ve overlooked.

At one level, you’ve got to give the Bugger credit. He’s accomplished a lot in a year, hasn’t he?

Let’s look forward.

In response to my inquiry, the now ever-present “AI Overview” indicates that since 1980, a sitting president’s party has lost an average of 20 seats in the House of Representatives in the midterm elections following his inauguration. In 2010, the first midterm after Mr. Obama’s inauguration, Democrats lost over 50; in 2018, the first midterm after Mr. Trump’s first inauguration, Republicans lost over 40. In our increasingly gerrymandered and hyper-toxic political climate – and because I believe that Mr. Trump’s popularity won’t sink much lower; it’s already about down to its unshakeable, rock-hard foundation — it is hard to believe that Republicans will lose as many House seats as they did in 2018. I have seen credible commentators indicate that House Republicans themselves currently – a huge qualifier – consider 15 to 25 of their members at serious risk of defeat. At least under the way American democracy has traditionally worked, if Democrats do grasp firm command of the House in 2027, for the last two years of the President’s term they will have the opportunity to politically neutralize him and his minions by passing populist measures that the Administration will reject; if Mr. Trump comes to be seen both as a lame duck generally and a political albatross for Congressional Republicans, they will magically transform from figurative lemmings (who in reality have more sense than they’re given credit for) to rats (who are indeed savvy survivors) fleeing a sinking ship. (Of course, this is assuming that Congressional Democrats have the political skill to effectively exploit any leverage they acquire. You can take that one.)

[An aside: in a note a while back on the most recent NO KINGS rallies, I indicated that Republican U.S. WI Rep. Brian Steil, who represents the Wisconsin First Congressional District, won his 2024 race by 2 points, and suggested that Mr. Steil was clearly politically endangered if there was indeed a “Democratic Wave” in 2026. When looking at the statistics from Mr. Steil’s race, I clearly read the wrong column; he won by 12 points in 2024. One has to assume that the Democratic Wave would have to be a tsunami for him to lose his seat. On the other hand, his Republican colleague, U.S. WI Rep. Derrick Van Orden representing the Wisconsin Third Congressional District, did, as I indicated in that same note, win his seat by about 3 points in 2024, and must be feeling a little uneasy at present.]

All that said, we’re back to the First Negotiation Strategy Commandment: Always assume that the other guy (in a genderless sense) is at least as bright as you are, and knows at least as much about the given circumstances as you do.

Mr. Trump and his people can read polls. That’s why at least the initial pivotal decisions next year will be theirs, not ours. The President’s advisors could attempt to correct course — try to get Mr. Trump to act less … Trump-like. (There is an eon of time before the midterms, as the late Marquette University Basketball Coach Al McGuire might say; President George H. W. Bush’s popularity was over 50% exactly one year before the 1992 election, and he still lost. Popularity can just as readily go up as down.) I am pretty sure that they are too smart for that. Although Mr. Trump could be saved from his ways in spite of himself – e.g., the economy could inexplicably improve for the financially stressed 80%, or he could get credit for reducing Americans healthcare concerns because enough House Republicans, to save their own political skins and despite Mr. Trump, work with House Democrats to restore Affordable Care Act subsidies — it is blatantly obvious to all with the IQ of a rock that Mr. Trump is viscerally incapable of changing his ways. So unless Mr. Trump receives unexpected political gifts that he doesn’t himself earn, one can seemingly confidently assume that the President’s advisors recognize that if they hope to stave off a Democratic House takeover in 2027, they will need to go on the offensive with division, distraction, intimidation, and lies:

Assume that there will be fears expressed in each of the districts currently represented by politically imperiled Congressional Republicans that a male highschooler transitioning to female is considering joining their girls high school basketball team. It won’t matter that the young person may have no more interest in hitting nor ability to hit a free throw than I do.

Assume that the Haitians in Springfield, OH, will be claimed to be resuming their diet of cats and dogs, joined by Somalis in Minneapolis.

Assume that mountains of federal largesse will suddenly be voted by the Republican Congress for these imperiled Republicans’ districts.

Assume that every murder in a “Blue City” will be reported endlessly in alt-right media following the event – the more heinous the act, the longer the coverage. They’ll get bonus points if the murder is committed by an immigrant or a person of color.

Assume that unprecedented amounts of campaign contributions will shower upon these 25 districts.

Assume an exponential increase of baseless claims of potential voter fraud.

Assume an aggressive effort to purge certain liberal-profile voters from critical districts’ registered rolls.

Assume unprecedented voter intimidation tactics; specifically, assume that ICE will make clear its intent to be in as close a proximity to polling places of heavily Latino swing districts as the law will allow – and that ICE will be stopping all of Latin descent to check their identifications as they attempt to enter and/or exit the polling place perimeter.

Assume lawsuits seeking to limit the times and places that voters can cast their ballots.

Assume that those who follow alt-right media will continue to live in their own alternate reality. We have Fox News Channel on our cable package. Although I can’t stomach it, TLOML will occasionally switch over when CNN is broadcasting an event or major story which tends to reflect badly on the Regime. Fox is NEVER covering it, at least while she is tuned in.

If as of the beginning of October, 2026, credible polls indicate that the above and like efforts seem unlikely to prevent a Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives, expect:

An October surprise. It could involve foreign policy, but more likely a bribe like a $250 “Trump 250^Th Bonus” to every American.

That the Regime will at least consider establishing a pretext to declare Martial Law and suspend elections.

Expecting a more comforting message as we begin the New Year? In what I hope is one of the few areas I share with Mr. Trump, you can’t say that I didn’t let you know what I was thinking. 😉 The religious days of the Holidays are over. The maxim, “Forewarned is forearmed,” is so common that it isn’t even attributed to anybody. (I actually checked.) While I have faith that the Almighty has provided many ways to achieve tranquility in the next life, I would submit that He (using a male pronoun for a genderless being) leaves it up to us to maintain – always peacefully — our tranquility in this one (although I do have faith that He’ll give us a little help if we ask for it 😊). Fortunately, as citizens of the United States of America, we still retain peaceful means to maintain the rights that the Founding Fathers envisioned for us a quarter of a millennium ago. I do believe that Americans who embrace the message of Thomas Jefferson – that all of us of every persuasion should have an equal opportunity to have a say in our nation’s future, and contribute to and be part of the promise of America – can make a comeback this year. So be ready for anything, and make your voice heard throughout the coming year. I do believe that such will make a difference – if in no other way, through the reinforcement of others. There is strength in numbers.

So maybe we do have decisions to make about what we do this year, after all. There is comfort in that.

Happy New Year.

On the National Guardsmen Shooting and Its Aftermath

[Note: “Guardsmen” is considered a gender-neutral term by the military, and will be so used here.]

With all of the recent controversy regarding the Trump Administration’s repeated striking of an allegedly drug-running boat in the South Caribbean Sea on September 2, the shootings of National Guardsmen U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, in Washington, D.C. on the day before Thanksgiving have more or less dropped off the news feeds I see. All are aware that Specialist Beckstrom has died. As this is typed, Sgt. Wolfe is reportedly improving despite grievous wounds.

I haven’t forgotten. These shootings continue to resonate with me with a force that I now generally only feel as deeply – a sad reflection of the desensitization seeping into me in our violence-riven society — when hearing of school shootings.

But I’m not only heartbroken. I’m livid.

Because it was so unnecessary. Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe didn’t have to be there. They could have been home celebrating Thanksgiving with their families.

I consider two men responsible for their deaths: Afghani Refugee Rahmanullah Lakanwal; and President Donald Trump.

Make no mistake: Mr. Lakanwal – given the apparently indisputable evidence that he was the perpetrator — pulled the trigger. It makes no difference that he may have saved American lives through his service in Afghanistan, or that he and some similarly-situated Afghanis may not have received as much federal assimilation assistance upon arrival here as might have been preferable, or that he fell prey to radicalization after arriving in this country, or noting any other explanation some rationalizer might attempt to dream up. He killed Specialist Beckstrom. He irrevocably altered Sgt. Wolfe’s life. Assuming that he is found guilty of the shootings after a fair trial according him all the rights to which he is entitled under the United States Constitution, Mr. Lakanwal deserves whatever sentence he receives; if the death penalty is legally rendered, I won’t lose any sleep over it.

That said, I was surprised to see Administration officials so quickly embrace the phrase, “targeted shooting,” to describe Mr. Lakanwal’s act – not because it wasn’t accurate, but because it so clearly was – and as such, a damning indictment of Mr. Trump. Under any reasonable assessment, National Guardsmen – tragically for them, in the persons of Ms. Beckstrom and Mr. Wolfe – were Mr. Lakanwal’s targets. Given the President’s ballyhooed deployment of National Guard to our nation’s capital, media reports of the areas they patrolled, and some simple reconnaissance, any unbalanced individual with much less than Mr. Lakanwal’s military background could easily project when and where Guardsmen would be. These two Guardsmen, walking at midday on a highly-traveled city street blocks from the White House with no indication of imminent danger, were no match for someone with Mr. Lakanwal’s training and experience.

Mr. Lakanwal simply shot the targets set up for him by Donald Trump.

Too harsh, you say? Consider the untaken alternatives: Mr. Lakanwal undoubtedly had hundreds of people in sight between the time he set out that day and the time he opened fire on the Guardsmen. One might surmise that at some point before the incident he had one or more D.C. police officers within easy range, who would have been no more prepared for his sudden assault than the Guardsmen were. He passed them all up to target members of the American military — who were only on that street because they were ordered to take part in what the Trump Administration has called “a crackdown on crime” – i.e., to participate in a quintessentially local law enforcement activity outside their traditional mission as part of an Administration public relations stunt which obviously has as its primary purposes the intimidation of its political opponents and scoring propaganda points with its gullible MAGA base.

So, what of this sacrifice of these two young people who had volunteered to serve their country?

Well, that’s Show Biz.

I would wager that in stationing Guardsmen in “Blue Cities” – largely against the wishes of local officials — Mr. Trump has been hoping for an incident in which cameras caught protestors behaving aggressively toward Guardsmen. I do not believe that he wanted or intended as tragic a result as has occurred – any more than a tavern patron who has had too many drinks wants or intends any automobile accident deaths that s/he ultimately causes – but anyone with the sense God gave a goose could anticipate that what did happen, might happen. In fact, on November 26^th,the New York Times quoted a California National Guardsman indicating, “he and his commanders worried that [their assignment to patrol Los Angeles] ‘increased our risk of us shooting civilians or civilians taking shots at us.’” In the same piece, the Times recorded that last August, Guard commanders involved in its Capital deployments issued communications “… warn[ng] that troops were in a ‘heightened threat environment’ … that ‘nefarious threat actors engaging in grievance based violence, and those inspired by foreign terrorist organizations’ might view the mission ‘as a target of opportunity’ … and that the mission ‘presents an opportunity for criminals, violent extremists, issue motivated groups and lone actors to advance their interests.’” The inherent risk was blatantly obvious. The President and his cohort just didn’t, and don’t, give a damn.

In the days after the incident, I saw reports indicating:

Item: Trump Administration claimed that Mr. Lakanwal was never vetted by the Biden Administration before being allowed to enter the country. This has now been debunked by so many sources – including sources that indicate that Mr. Lakanwal’s latest clearance came this spring, from the Trump Administration – that I don’t know if the Regime is still spouting this; of course, anything is possible from an organization that loudly continued to repeat a uniformly-debunked lie about Springfield, OH, Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs.

Item: The Trump Administration has halted the processing of immigration requests from anyone from Afghanistan. It’s not unreasonable to assume that many of these applicants are seeking refuge after aiding our efforts against the Taliban. I have seen reports that since returning to power, the Taliban has brutally persecuted those Afghanis suspected of assisting us. The Trump Administration halt is a monstrous overreaction to the evil act of one radicalized Afghani, which could well have fatal consequences for thousands of our Afghani associates ultimately abandoned as an outcome of a wrongheaded withdrawal agreement negotiated by the first Trump Administration.

Item: The Trump administration vowed to conduct a sweeping re-examination of “every Green Card” held not only by all Afghanis already admitted to our country but also those held by nationals from almost a score of other Middle Eastern, African and South American countries which the Regime has subjected to a travel ban. I know – I’m wasting my typing and your eyesight to point out that there is no logical link between a tragically-radicalized Afghani and thousands of other immigrants from across the world legally here under other programs. Given the “Ready, Fire, Aim,” Nazi Sturmabteilung approach the Regime has taken to immigration enforcement, perhaps thousands of unquestionably innocent people will be caught up in this surge. To state the obvious: if it proceeds with such an examination, the Regime will simply have used this incident as a pretext for indulging its racial, religious, and political biases.

Item: That the Trump Administration is looking into the possibility of deporting Mr. Lakanwal’s family. (Any competent criminal investigation will certainly explore whether others were aware of or complicit in Mr. Lakanwal’s act. If there is evidence of others’ culpability, either within or outside Mr. Lakanwal’s family, those whose guilt can be established should be criminally tried and appropriately sentenced, not deported.) Absent sufficient evidence of culpability of specific members of Mr. Lakanwal’s family members, deporting the innocents as a consequence of this incident is every bit as conceptually constitutionally sound as, say … holding Mr. Trump’s wife and children liable for the $88 million he owes E. Jean Carroll for sexual assault and defamation.

These measures, if carried out, smack of fascism – demonizing “others” for political gain with literally no factual foundation.

Are we done? Not quite yet. Let’s consider a potentially even more dire consequence of the assault upon Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe: that patrolling Guardsmen begin to view those walking around them as potential enemies – an approach necessary in foreign war zones, but frighteningly fraught on American soil (while at the same time seemingly becoming understandable). (If you were a Guardsman, wouldn’t this incident make you view those moving around you with greater suspicion?) Recall that the Times piece cited above quoted a Guardsman observing that the deployments increased the “risk of us shooting civilians.”

Let’s end this overly-long rant with the most idiotic irony: Mr. Trump’s announcement that given the shooting, he intends to deploy an additional 500 National Guardsmen to D.C. One just has to sit back, pause, and blink before continuing. As noted above, the pretext for this Administration grandstand is a “crackdown” on what let’s call, for purposes of this note, “commonplace” crime in D.C. If the shooting of Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe was indeed a shooting targeted at U.S. military – a rare point of agreement between the Noise and the Regime – it wasn’t even the type of “crime” that the deployment was intended to address. Not only that: I have seen reports that prior to embarking on his mission, Mr. Lakanwal was living in Washington state, not D.C. – so he could not conceivably even have been among the D.C. criminal element that Mr. Trump was intending to confront through the deployment. If Guardsmen hadn’t been in D.C., there certainly wouldn’t have been as many or arguably as vulnerable military targets in the city as Mr. Trump’s order provided to Mr. Lakanwal. Because of the President’s order, Guardsmen Beckstrom and Wolfe were in place to be shot while taking part in maneuvers beyond the proper military purview by a malign operator who wasn’t covered by the Regime’s expressed mission. So, explain to me the logic of adding 500 additional targets to an already target-rich environment for deranged individuals in our gun-obsessed environment because of a heinous incident that wasn’t within the mission’s scope committed by somebody who wasn’t from D.C.

On the day they were shot, Ms. Beckstrom and Mr. Wolfe’s ages averaged to 22 – which, in turn, is only half of the average age of our three children. These two young victims enlisted to serve their country – something I never did. They had their whole lives in front of them. They deserved a Commander in Chief worthy of them. Theirs, and perhaps the lives of thousands of innocent immigrants, have been irrevocably altered — in sacrifice to a propaganda stunt.

There is an episode of The West Wing in which Martin Sheen’s fictional President Bartlet makes a wrong decision, and a number of U.S. service members are killed as a result. The episode – among the most poignant in a series that all who read these notes know that I consider the best television program in history – ends with Mr. Sheen’s Bartlet standing on the tarmac at the military airport where the deceased service members’ bodies have been flown back to the states. Mr. Sheen is a great actor, and even without seeing the episode one can imagine the agony he shows as Bartlet as the caskets, draped in flags, are solemnly marched, one by one, by pristinely-uniformed, white-gloved honor guards, from the aircraft to where the President stands, with a brief pause in front of him, and then moved to a waiting inner chamber.

Mr. Trump is a father. I wonder: Does he ever think about the damage and destruction he has done to so many lives and careers with his deranged, malicious, shock-jock, made-for-TV machinations? In what is probably the most awful suggestion I have ever made about Mr. Trump in all the years I have been posting in these pages: He doesn’t.

I pray that Specialist Beckstrom can rest in peace.

On Blowing Up Boats

What with Holiday preparations, general affairs (we’ve had A LOT of snow early in the winter in Madison), and working on another, still-unfinished post, I haven’t previously expounded – perhaps “ranted” would be a more apt description — on President Donald Trump’s Administration’s blowing up of allegedly drug-running boats in international waters. What has caused me to take your time here is an observation that seems to me to be the most critical facet – and potentially the most supportive aspect for the preservation of our democracy – of the possible ramifications of the Regime’s launching of four strikes on a boat on September 2, 2025. (I believe that it is undisputed that two occupants of the boat survived the first strike, but were killed in the second. Two subsequent strikes – apparently to completely obliterate the vessel itself – followed.) I feel it is appropriate to note that potentially supportive aspect here because it occurred to me before I saw any media commentator make it.

However, let’s first – as a client of mine used to say decades ago when reviewing the progress of an ongoing negotiation – review the bidding regarding these operations.

The Administration claims that its actions are justified because we are at “war” with “narco-terrorists.” Note how skillfully Mr. Trump and his minions have moved the goal posts: it seems that the majority of commentators feel obligated to start their commentaries regarding these actions with the proviso, “assuming we are at war.” These talking heads might as well say, “Well, assuming Siamese cats are tigers …” The Administration’s whole premise is absurd. [The justification for the last two strikes on the boat on September 2 makes one blink: “We had to make sure that the boat could no longer be used [as an instrument of war] against us.” What? Relative to our U.S. Naval strength, the boat was a canoe. This is akin to calling a contest between the Los Angeles Dodgers and a West Madison Little League team, “a baseball game.” We are not at war.

Next. The United States certainly has the right to use legitimate means to limit illicit drug smuggling into our country. These Regime activities glaringly fail the legitimacy test. First, as far as I know, no satisfactory evidence has been given that any specific struck boat was actually carrying drugs. One of the primary premises of this nation is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Where did that go? U.S. KY Sen. Rand Paul has noted statistics indicating that over the years our U.S. Coast Guard interceptions of suspected trafficking vessels have failed to discover drugs 25% of the time – from which one could infer that perhaps 20 of the 80 killed in these strikes have been innocent. [I heard one pundit suggest a particularly sad nuance: that cartels may be requiring otherwise law-abiding individuals to undertake drug runs upon threat that their loved ones will otherwise be tortured or killed. (Such a scenario seems increasingly credible given the cartels’ now-understandable concern about the risk that the Regime’s actions pose to their personnel.) Although these coerced individuals would, if apprehended, be guilty of drug smuggling, under such pressure either you or I would undertake these missions.] Second, subject to your correction, I do not believe that drug trafficking offenses are generally characterized as capital crimes under U.S. law. Mr. Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are bullies who clearly just enjoy beating up on the weak and pandering their manhood to the gullible MAGA base. Whether those operating these struck boats have been guilty or innocent, with every strike the Regime is arguably in violation of international law.

Let’s step back a minute. I can’t resist.

As all who care are aware, in November six Congressional Democrats with military or national security backgrounds released a video in which they advised our current members of the military that they had the right to disobey “unlawful orders.” Mr. Trump quickly fired back with posts on his social network proclaiming that the members’ behavior was “seditious behavior, punishable by death,” indicated that these members should be arrested and tried, and forwarded a post asserting that the members should be hanged. Aside from the fact that Mr. Trump’s accusations were wholly baseless, the depth of irony of such declarations, coming from a man who lied about losing an election and incited a seditious attack on our nation’s Capitol, is literally nauseating.

As this is typed, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth are in the process of shifting all of the responsibility for the second strike on the boat in the September 2 incident — the strike that killed the two individuals who survived the first strike – to Adm. Frank Bradley (who is currently reported to have ordered the second strike after Mr. Hegseth, apparently undisputedly, had given the order to “Kill Them All” before the first strike) – while disingenuously appearing to support the Admiral’s action. Such is obviously a despicable abdication of responsibility. Former President Harry Truman – who coined our most pithy, well-known description of presidential responsibility, “The Buck Stops Here” – must be rolling over in his grave. (Of course, Mr. Truman, a man of rectitude, has probably already figuratively drilled at least halfway to China beneath his gravestone throughout the Trump presidencies; this latest outrage has probably just made him spin a little faster.)

I haven’t done any research on Adm. Bradley; I have no idea whether he was by nature a willing participant in this operation or merely acting as a reluctantly-obedient subordinate when he ordered the second strike (if he indeed did). If there is any substance to the opinions being voiced by military legal experts seemingly across the political media spectrum – and even accepting the baseless premise that we are at war with drug cartels (see; even I’m doing it 😉) – there may well be grounds warranting the Admiral’s placement under court martial for a war crime (as well as the personnel who actually executed the strike). A vital reminder: all the evidence is almost certainly not yet in, and the Admiral is scheduled to meet with members of Congress today in confidential sessions. That said, if he and his involved subordinates do suffer severe consequences for the actions they took on September 2 – while at the same time the Trump Administration seeks to exonerate Mr. Hegseth and distance Mr. Trump from the incident – I would submit that the incident potentially provides a silver – nay, gold – lining for the preservation of our democracy: by their unscrupulous, gutless behavior, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth will have alienated the entire American military.

If in the future Mr. Trump or Mr. Hegseth orders military personnel to move against peaceful American protestors – recall that Mark Esper, the last Secretary of Defense in the first Trump Administration, related in his memoir, A Sacred Oath, that when demonstrators protested in Washington, D.C., after the murder of George Floyd, Mr. Trump asked authorities, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” — do you think they’ll obey the order? Would you?

The most instructive aspect of this incident will be how Mr. Trump reacts. It was clear from the day Mr. Trump nominated Mr. Hegseth that he was an atrociously stupid choice as Secretary of Defense. However, when challenged, the President ALWAYS doubles down, considers admission of mistake an indication of weakness, pushes through – and with his core supporters, it has worked for the last decade. I wonder how such an approach will work with the military, which has maintained a fiercely nonpartisan tradition – while being acutely aware of its own position and prerogatives –throughout this country’s existence. I was never in the military, so anything I venture is obviously the broadest speculation; but one can question how much support Mr. Trump will retain with the military if he reflexively clings to and protects Mr. Hegseth.

You can’t be a dictator without controlling your citizenry. You can’t control your citizenry without a military that obeys you.

I am well aware that my notes of optimism in recent posts are no more than slivers of reassurance in an era of tragedy. Still, they’re better than nothing.

Stay well – and for those in the north, stay warm. 😊

The Race is On

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

Chinese General and Philosopher Sun Tzu (544 BC – 496 BC); The Art of War

I think we can confidently assume that President Donald Trump has never heard of Sun Tzu, but I would venture that a number of his strategists have.

The race to preserve the American way of life is beginning in earnest.

I have mentioned a couple of times in these pages since Mr. Trump was reelected that I presumed that Mr. Trump and his adherents recognized that on their best day, they only had the support of half of the American public, and understood that they needed to employ the Nazi model of the 1930s to quickly consolidate their control of our country if they were going to be able to reshape it to their vision. They have certainly done so. An exhaustive list of their nondemocratic activities since taking office would probably consume more life space that either of us have remaining, so let’s limit ourselves to just a few:

Deploying National Guard troops on the streets of Los Angeles and Chicago over the objections of local authorities, seeking to deploy them in Portland, OR (again, over the objections of local authorities), and threatening New York and other cities whose citizens clearly oppose the Trump Regime. (Add to that the Regime’s recent assemblage of all senior military officers, in which Mr. Trump’s vaguely referred to use of our active military in American cities. This was arguably intended to intimidate reluctant officers; these men and women are understandably worried about their careers like everyone else.)

Promiscuously employing ICE agents across the country. The incidents of ICE agents’ overzealous and at times unwarranted actions are too numerous to mention. I speculated in a post after Mr. Trump pardoned the January 6, 2021, insurrectionists that the pardoned Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers might provide the President his own private Sturmabteilung (the “SA”; Adolf Hitler’s Brownshirts, who terrorized Nazi opponents before he took power). ICE is arguably edging toward being the Regime’s quasi-legal Sturmabteilung. (ICE agents were recently walking the streets of Madison, WI. Madison’s “illegal” Latino population cannot be significant by nationwide standards; however, since Madison is the heart of anti-Trump sentiment in swing state Wisconsin, the Administration was laying a predicate.)

Blowing up small boats in international waters. There has been, of course, no evidence presented that any of these boats were carrying illegal drugs headed for the United States. The notion that we are fighting a “war” which justifies American use of deadly force without adjudication is absurd. This is rogue nation murder.

The Administration’s recently-commenced prosecutions of former FBI Director James Comey and New York State Attorney General Letitia James by some pretty former lackey lawyer of Mr. Trump’s for alleged crimes that career federal prosecutors were unwilling to pursue. The Regime isn’t trying to hide its attempt to seek retribution against its enemies; it is reveling in it. That is the point.

We don’t need to go back over the inaction of gutless Congressional Republicans, the complicity of the Administration’s Supreme Court, the Regime’s attempt to intimidate powerful universities that oppose it, and MAGA-controlled state legislatures’ current mid-cycle redistricting efforts to stave off the Administration’s otherwise historically seemingly almost certain loss of control of the U.S. House of Representatives in January, 2026.

Given Mr. Trump’s obvious dictatorial inclinations, all of these could be predicted. What I have found yet more instructive is Mr. Trump’s approach to the government shutdown.

In a post a few weeks ago, I asserted that forcing a government shutdown was an ill-conceived strategy for Democrats in their battle for public opinion because “… the next time that Americans ultimately blame a government shutdown on the party in power … will be the first time.” If reported polls are accurate, I have so far been wrong (I bet you find that shocking 😊); Democrats have been holding their own. Having been wrong has obviously never deterred me from offering further opinions, so I will venture this: Democrats have found such support among a wide swath of the Americans not only because their position against skyrocketing health care premiums has “broken through” to the public but because Mr. Trump’s marginal 2024 voters – the ones that put him over the top – have become uneasy with the Administration’s autocratic excesses, not what they expected (despite Mr. Trump’s clear campaign rhetoric; we always have to give him that) or wanted.

Mr. Trump is the savviest reader and manipulator of public opinion in our generation. He can read the polls. Account after account in the media has indicated that the increase in Affordable Care Act premiums and loss of Medicaid benefits projected to be wrought by his markedly unpopular “Big Beautiful Bill (the ‘BBB’)” will disproportionately adversely impact his voters. At the same time, he is so much better at messaging than the Democrats that on any day, he could sweep in, tell his lickspittle Congressional Republicans to support the legislative measures Democrats want, and claim that he brokered the peace. He clearly can’t give a damn about any increase to our federal deficit resulting from the Democrats’ measure; even his staunchest supporters would have to concede that he doesn’t care about debt. And a year from now, his gullible supporters won’t recall that their access to affordable health care was preserved by the Democrats’ stand.

So why doesn’t he deal?

I would submit that it is because his priority is consolidation of power, not policy or even popularity within his base. I’ll venture that he sees this as a pivotal moment; if Democrats are perceived – not among hardcore MAGAs, but among independents – to have scored a victory, he will be weakened when he has not yet fully taken control of the American populace. He is out to crush the opposition at this moment, when his autocratic measures are confronting increasing discontent in a citizenry that for 250 years has been accustomed to think and speak for itself.

All who read these notes are aware that we regularly tune in to MSNBC’s Morning Joe, and that my inclinations frequently align with the show’s host, former U.S. FL Rep. Joe Scarborough. That said, I have recently been raising an eyebrow at Mr. Scarborough’s observations about the ultimate political ramifications of the Trump Regime’s increasingly autocratic measures; his comments have frequently been in the vein, “What goes around comes around; they should be worried about the next time, when Democrats take control of the White House and Congress.” My attitude is different, formed from the approach that I took toward negotiating commercial arrangements for almost 40 years: assume that the other guy (in a genderless sense, of course 😉) is at least as bright as you are, and knows at least as much as you do. So if s/he’s acting in a way that seems contrary to his/her interest, what does s/he know that you’re not factoring in?

I would suggest that the answer is straightforward, certainly supported by Regime actions during its first nine months seemingly contrary to its own political popularity: MAGAs don’t intend to let it “come around,” or that there will be “a next time.” To suggest otherwise defies what is right before our eyes. Too many have spent too much of the last decade underestimating Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.

The next federal midterm elections will be held on November 3, 2026, obviously just a little over a year distant. When Mr. Trump was reelected, I thought that the struggle for the American way of life might be put off until the 2028 presidential election; now I think the upcoming election is the key.

Remember Sun Tzu. While all demonstrations against the Regime must be peaceful – to do otherwise plays into its hands – don’t be subdued. Hopefully, you will have the opportunity to participate in a NO KINGS rally today. Although we have seen any number of truly witty signs over the last nine months, I plan to carry the ultimate symbol of protest and freedom – an American flag.